At least one photo I hadn't previously seen, even as Pennsylvania officials were telling the media that all was going well last Tuesday. Even while we documented, in no uncertain terms, that it wasn't.

(Hat-tip to NCVoter's Joyce McCloy, to whom we wish the best of luck in the upcoming North Carolina primary. What could possibly go wrong?)

UPDATE: Several readers have written in to point out the above photo does come from Allentown, PA, but from the 2006 election, as originally reported here. Can't believe I'd never seen that photo before! In any case, happy to put it on the official BRAD BLOG record here, as just one more way these machines can fail on Election Day, leaving the possibility of voters unable to even cast a ballot (much less have it be counted in a way that can be verified as accurate, a notion that is strictly impossible with the type of voting machine seen above, even when it "works" as designed!)

Thanks Lou and Floridiot. Since those last two would appear to be from a different election (though represented by the Obama link as being from PA), I'm removing those pics. The first one, however, was labeled as Allentown (who does use that model of Diebold, seen smashed there), so unless that too is found to be from elsewhere, I'll keep it up there.

{Ed Note: Mark, I fixed your link problem in here. I think you have the link button feature confused and you should make sure the URL you want shows up in the comment box before posting, otherwise people get something that looks like a link but isn't. If you have trouble, don't worry, the software will turn any URL into a link automatically if you just paste it in the comment box. --99}

How does voting in rigged elections further the cause of citizen ownership of transparent participatory democracy?

I remember when we voted for Gore in 2000 because we believed that a Gore/Lieberman ticket would be less evil than a Bush/Cheney ticket, and we were shocked, shocked I tell you, when Gore conceded to Bush "for the good of the country" and then later on when Lieberman turned out to be one of Bush's biggest supporters.

I remember when we voted for Kerry in 2004 because we believed that a Kerry/Edwards ticket was less evil than another four years of Bush/Cheney and we were shocked, shocked I tell you, when Kerry broke his promises not to concede early and to ensure that our votes were counted, and conceded to Bush "for the good of the country."

If the Democrats do this country any more good, there won't be anything left of it.

....There is a long tradition of mistrust of citizens among politicians in Germany. In 1948, Theodor Heuss, a German politician and former president, expressly warned against direct democracy in the Parliamentary Council, describing it as a "premium for every demagogue." Article 20 of the German constitution states, simply, that "all authority comes from the people." But in Germany, as the philosopher Karl Jaspers complained, the fathers of the constitution were apparently "afraid of the people." The German constitution reduces "the effectiveness of the people to a minimum," Jaspers acknowledged in 1966....

....Volker Mittendorf, a researcher with the University of Marburg, says this experience can have a positive effect. "Once people have tried it and have been successful, they become increasingly interested in getting involved in politics." For many people, says Mittendorf, it is no longer enough to go to the polls once every few years and, in the interim, to observe the shenanigans of their elected representatives with dismay....

The article ends:

Paradoxically, the ballots contain nothing but a simple request: "We ask the Berlin Senate to abandon its intentions to close the airport immediately." In other words, the referendum would not even be legally binding. This means that Mayor Wowereit will be able to completely ignore Berliners' Tempelhof decision, a fact that he has already made clear in his famously callous way.

Democracy experts like Häfner warn that cases like this could also trigger a backlash. According to Häfner, "failed referendums can even amplify political apathy."

But that is a VERY misleading statement. The public passion expressed at those meetings and in the referendum efforts is NOT apathy. By "apathy" they mean people losing interest in tyranny, government by unaccountable officials over whom the people have no control, and instead gaining a passion for real democracy, true democracy, direct democracy, participatory democracy, where the people actually govern.

How many more stolen elections, corrupt administrations, and wars of aggression is it going to take us to stop making the same mistake over and over?

Self-governance, government by the people, is something that no elected representative, no matter how saintly they may be, can do for us. Unless we had a way to hold them accountable, which we don't, we have to stop believing in political saviors and and start believing in ourselves. At our worst we couldn't have effed things up worse than our "elected" representatives have done. If nothing else, I can guarantee you that we wouldn't have outsourced our own jobs.

I know its early over there, but Mark S's New Declaration of Independence at # 6 isn't working. For what its worth Mark, I think your on the right track, or the Founding Fathers wouldn't have put this In our Declaration of Independence:

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--
Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

The emphasis is mine, but I think people would do well by rereading the whole Declaration to get a grip and see just how many transgressions have been committed!

That picture is from 2006.
"Tues., Nov. 7, 2006
ALLENTOWN, Pa. - A would-be voter in Pennsylvania was arrested Tuesday at a polling place in Allentown after smashing an electronic voting machine with a paperweight, according to poll workers."picture

Yeah, even that remaining image was not from any 2008 election. That was from when a man smashed a voting machine with a small statue or figurine. I'm thinking that was last year or '06. Anyway, I don't have time to find it... needless to say that it's an old pic.

Hey, check out OnTheOtherHand from DemocraticUnderground. He's the guy who just never shuts up. Why is Professor Mark Lindeman all over that forum, while others get banned and have their posts scrubbed?

This guy worked with republican Rick Brady. He backed the work of Damshroeder's buddy Steven Hertzberg of the Election Science Institute. He's recently trolling Brad over at DU.

I'm sick and tired that more people aren't going after these astroturfers. This guy is a "neolib." Check out this video where he "evokes authority" and basically shits on democracy.

Why has Democratic Underground let these republican shills dominate their election reform rooms? How come Bev Harris, Kathy Dopp, John Dean, TruthIsAll, and many others get banned, but Kelvin Mace {David Allen}, this guy, and all those others remain? Why has Skinner allowed all those hate posts with no proof concerning Beverly Harris?

Come on. Can anyone explain how Democratic Underground isn't part of the problem?

Check this guy out. Check out his elitist demeanor. This guy reeks of being a shill for the status quo.

It doesn't add up why he is all over DU. I think the only reason Brad is still allowed to post there is because if they banned him, then it would be even more obvious that the Democratic Underground is a corrupt website.